The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1341  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:46 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
I don't see admiring Diana for her very many good qualities and for the admirable causes she promoted, as being 'partisan'.
Nor would I. Nothing of the kind was said.

Since this is referencing something I characterized, I will give the context. The word 'partisan' was used in reference to those who view Diana as in the right and Hewitt in the wrong for doing exactly the same thing. The view was being expressed that Hewitt did not have the 'right' to talk about his own life in a memoir-kind of way, but Diana did have the 'right' to say and intimate all manner of things about Charles and the BRF (and possibly negatively impact the BRF in so doing) in her memoir-type book (though admittedly not actually a 'memoir') and interviews in general. This is partisan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
It doesn't mean that I or others who stick up for her are blind to her faults or vices (and goodness knows THEY'VE certainly been discussed ad nauseum on these threads.)
Understood. However, please note the distinction made, that when Diana cannot err in situations where others are very much penalized, that is partisan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
On the other hand, many of those who dislike Diana can barely find a good word to say about her, and when they do it's in a most begrudging way. She was a human being, like any other. Yes, she had terrible insecurities but she also touched thousands of lives in a good way.
Very general. Not sure who the 'many of those' are. Impossible to figure out what you are referencing. So I'll pass on this comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
As for James Hewitt. I wouldn't care if he talked about Diana until Kingdom come, all over the world. It's the doing so for money (a lot of money in his case) that I object to. It's the trying to sell her letters for millions in the US (a move that didn't succeed) the appearance on a TV show where Hewitt pretended to be hypnotised and in so doing stated an earlier date for when they'd met (bringing forth the whole 'Hewitt is Harry's father' debate once more.) In a way the woman who once loved him and whom he loved turned into a cash cow for him again and again. That's why I regard him as rather a grub.
Money, power, fame - would you equate all these? Would you say that someone who sells someone out for money is a grub? You would because you have said so. How about power and fame? Would you say that someone who sells someone out for power and fame a grub? Because that's what Diana did with Charles (and the BRF). If anyone was 'cashing in' on her proximity to royalty it was Diana. I could hardly believe it when I read it, but she went so far as to denigrate Charles' ability to satisfy her. I'd call that grubby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Is Hewitt incapable of spinning lies or being deceitful? Why are his memoirs to be regarded as truth personified? He was and is just as anxious to spin his side of the tale as Diana ever was about hers.
He doesn't actually spin that much. I've read one of his books and he is actually very circumspect regarding Diana. Not one salacious detail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Several posters do like emphasising the damage etc that Diana caused but don't seem to be able to acknowledge that the woman also had many good points, or that she ever did a thing right, so much so that there was criticism on another thread of the way she and her children ate supper sometimes in front of the TV!
Ooops! This is me. Questioning a chef's statement about Diana always sitting in front of the telly having supper on trays with her children is not a criticism of Diana. I was questioning the veracity of the article, or the chef. Why should we believe this chef? It sounded more like an urban legend he was repeating than actual facts.

I've read the 'Housekeeper's Diary' in which Mrs Barry indicates that Diana (in the later days at Highgrove before the separation) often purposely kept the two boys with her in the evening (with supper on trays in front of the telly) in order to deny Charles the evening sit-down meal with his family. That's the only eye-witness account I've read about trays in front of the telly, and the motivation was a bit sad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
He is similar to Fergie in that way, but I don't dislike her, either. They are both people who think it's OK to make money from opportunities they have as a result of their intimate relationships. They are taking advantage of opportunities they had because of their connections, as most of us do one way or the other.
In that 'they' I would include Diana. Diana did not stop playing her 'royal card' (because she had married Charles and produced the heir) for one second of her life after she married. She milked it every day. She expected consideration.

What a different story it all would have been had she spent some of her settlement money on the purchase of a lovely estate somewhere that she loved, and retired from the public scene since she could not conduct her public duties as the Princess of Wales next to the Prince of Wales. Far more impressive had she done that rather than calling in photo-ops to the press for her lover's tryst on a boat.
__________________

__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #1342  
Old 06-05-2016, 02:53 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,125
I think that last remark is a bit odd Nimue... Diana wanted a public role, and she did still continue to work at her charity work after her divorce. Yes of course she lived as a royal, she was rich and royal, why should she not? Why should she ntot ask to be treated as such? What has that got to do with the fact that Hewitt used his affair with her to write books which everyone knows would never have been read or sold had he not been Diana's lover? I don't entirely approve of her doing the Morton bbook or the Panormaa interview, but they were done to get out of her marriage or at least to sort out her position as the wife of a royal who no longer wanted her as his wife. She wanted a divorce or to have her position regularised as the mother of a future King...who was not living with her husband. It was not done for money.
Hewitt left the army. He had a pension and he could have gotten other work, but he didn't want to do that, he wanted recognition for being Diana's lover and he watned to make a living off the back of that... and he publicised the affair in such a way that he might well have completely destroyed Diana's reputation.. He even cast doubts on Harry's parentage.. I can't see ANY equvuivalnce .
And I cant see why you feel Diana should buy an estate (she didn't like the country) and retire into private life, when she could still do good iwht her charity wrok
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1343  
Old 06-05-2016, 03:36 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
Would regarding Charles as 'erring in situations where others are severely penalised' (such as sleeping with a fellow officer's wife) be 'partisan', as well? After all, according to Household cavalry regulations an officer found in adultery with another officer's wife (the case with Charles and Andrew PB's spouse) would be liable to penalties like being thrown out of the regiment.
Reply With Quote
  #1344  
Old 06-05-2016, 04:03 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,125
Its not that likely, that he would be thrown out, but it is a situation that can lead to problems. I mean if you were to get rid of every officer that slept iwth a fellow officers wife..! But I simply cant understand anyone thinking that Hewitts behaviour was not ungentlemanly to the point of really nasty.
I am increasingly sure, for example that she and Carling were invovled but he's always denied it. HOare has refused to speak of his affair with her..
Reply With Quote
  #1345  
Old 06-05-2016, 05:54 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
Understood. I stand corrected, though I do own that I do it when solo. I just find it odd to do when one is dealing with family, young children and all. I don't find the description of Diana's eating habits with her children endearing. Quite the reverse. Yet another example of her unusual attitudes imo. If true and accurate. Can we trust the chef?

I have to admit that I flashed that the claim is made to make the royal appear more 'normal'. Alls it does for me is make it seem strange, because sitting eating in front of the television with your children is not being with one's children imo. Lost time, lost opportunity for conversation and catching-up.
__________________

Lady Nimue, in what way is your post, which I quote above, from another thread admittedly (I beg the mod's indulgence but this refers to part of Lady Nimue's above reply to my post) a criticism of the chef's veracity (apart from one or two remarks?)

What I read from it is that you disapprove of supper on trays, which is fair enough, but we then get from the above, it's the 'reverse of endearing', 'odd' 'unusual attitudes' 'not (really) being with one's children' 'lost opportunity for conversation' etc. In what way is that not being a criticism not of the chef but of Diana's parenting skills?
Reply With Quote
  #1346  
Old 06-05-2016, 10:53 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I think that last remark is a bit odd Nimue... Diana wanted a public role, and she did still continue to work at her charity work after her divorce. Yes of course she lived as a royal, she was rich and royal, why should she not? Why should she ntot ask to be treated as such? What has that got to do with the fact that Hewitt used his affair with her to write books which everyone knows would never have been read or sold had he not been Diana's lover? I don't entirely approve of her doing the Morton bbook or the Panormaa interview, but they were done to get out of her marriage or at least to sort out her position as the wife of a royal who no longer wanted her as his wife. She wanted a divorce or to have her position regularised as the mother of a future King...who was not living with her husband. It was not done for money
Hewitt left the army. He had a pension and he could have gotten other work, but he didn't want to do that, he wanted recognition for being Diana's lover and he watned to make a living off the back of that... and he publicised the affair in such a way that he might well have completely destroyed Diana's reputation.. He even cast doubts on Harry's parentage.. I can't see ANY equvuivalnce .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville
People shoudl not make money out of their intimate relationships, or publicise them in that way adn especially if it is a man about a woman. Diana's position was very delicate.. If she had not had public support once her affair with Hewitt became known (Luckily by and large the public felt sorry for her and felt she was entitled to a lover when her marriage had gone wrong).. his outing the affair might have destroyed her position with the RF. As it was, they felt that she was still very popular wth the public and if she was divorced, she would have to be treated fairly and with generosity..]Fergie lost popularity with the public because she was so silly and her affair with Bryan was revealed and the RF didn't treat her very well in her divorce settlement.. J Hewitt obviously did not care about Di or he woudl have kept his mouth SHUT.
Denville, I am finding it difficult to reconcile the bolded sections of your posts. Diana not only wanted to ensure her public standing (I am not so sure she wanted a divorce), but she undoubtedly wanted to destroy Charles' public standing.

I also think that Diana's actions hurt both Harry and William far more than anything Hewitt has said or done. I've seen no evidence that Hewitt has caused Harry to doubt his parentage. On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence that Diana's sons were deeply hurt by her public disclosures, particularly the Panorama interview. The Morton book may not have cast doubts on Harry's parentage, but it may have caused him to question whether Charles loved or wanted him when he was born. That had to hurt.

If it was okay for Diana to "out" Charles and Camilla, it was okay for Hewitt to "out" her.
Reply With Quote
  #1347  
Old 06-05-2016, 11:25 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
When have William and/or Harry ever stated that they were hurt or upset by Diana's Panorama interview? Harry was at Ludgrove at the time and it's doubtful he ever saw it, at least in childhood. There's been a lot of speculation that William was devastated by the revelations and watched it alone in the headmaster's study at Eton. TV movies have asserted he was haunted by his mother's statements but we don't know that it is true.

Was William (or his brother) hurt by the Dimbleby biography of Charles, in which their father hinted that he wasn't in love really when he had married Diana but his father had put pressure on him to marry? We don't know that either, but I think that would be equally devastating. Was William hurt when he saw his mother's misery, her weeping, over Charles's affair with Camilla? One would think so. Were either of the boys hurt at the time when the woman their mother had hated eventually moved into St James's Palace with their father? In fact there is hurt to spare in this saga, from both parents.
Reply With Quote
  #1348  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:11 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
When have William and/or Harry ever stated that they were hurt or upset by Diana's Panorama interview? Harry was at Ludgrove at the time and it's doubtful he ever saw it, at least in childhood. There's been a lot of speculation that William was devastated by the revelations and watched it alone in the headmaster's study at Eton. TV movies have asserted he was haunted by his mother's statements but we don't know that it is true.

Was William (or his brother) hurt by the Dimbleby biography of Charles, in which their father hinted that he wasn't in love really when he had married Diana but his father had put pressure on him to marry? We don't know that either, but I think that would be equally devastating. Was William hurt when he saw his mother's misery, her weeping, over Charles's affair with Camilla? One would think so. Were either of the boys hurt at the time when the woman their mother had hated eventually moved into St James's Palace with their father? In fact there is hurt to spare in this saga, from both parents.
First, I think that much of your post is off topic. However, there are many sources that Diana regretted the Panorama interview because William and Harry were angry and upset. The one I can find offhand is "Diana--The Last Word" by Simmone SImons and Ingrid Seward. I think it is a safe assumption that children will be upset when a parent cooperates with a book or goes on television and discusses private matters.
Reply With Quote
  #1349  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:13 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,021
I am betting that at some point William (and probably Harry) have discussed that interview (and his own interview) with their dad....and made peace with it.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #1350  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:20 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I am betting that at some point William (and probably Harry) have discussed that interview (and his own interview) with their dad....and made peace with it.


LaRae
I am sure that is true. I was responding to Denville's point that Hewitt is a cad, in part because he cast doubt on Harry's paternity, while justifying Diana's book. My point was and is, that Diana's (and Charles') disclosures were more hurtful to William and Harry than anything Hewitt said or did.
Reply With Quote
  #1351  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:24 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,021
Oh I agree...what D&C said in their respective interviews (and books) was very hurtful to those boys. That said I think it beyond low that the issue of Harry's paternity was raised. Any person who does this has no class.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #1352  
Old 06-05-2016, 12:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
Hewitt went on a TV show, in one of the periods when he needed money, supposedly undertook hypnosis, and 'under the influence' broadly hinted that he and Diana had got together much earlier than they had and that therefore there was a chance that....
Reply With Quote
  #1353  
Old 06-05-2016, 02:40 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,125
well I wont bother to reply at length, since I think that Curryong etc have done so effectively. Im sure the boys WERE Hurt by Diana's revelations and by Charles' but that said, they are their parents.. and they love them. Hewitt cast doubt on Harry's paternity. THat is indeed the lowest of the low
Reply With Quote
  #1354  
Old 06-05-2016, 03:37 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
well I wont bother to reply at length, since I think that Curryong etc have done so effectively. Im sure the boys WERE Hurt by Diana's revelations and by Charles' but that said, they are their parents.. and they love them. Hewitt cast doubt on Harry's paternity. THat is indeed the lowest of the low
So you are only upset about TV show in which he was hypnotized, which happened a few years ago? Your earlier posts seemed to refer to his book and other interviews, which didn't cast any doubts on Harry's paternity.
Reply With Quote
  #1355  
Old 06-06-2016, 01:45 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,125
No that is NOT all i am bothered about. It was wrong fro him to use his affair with Diana to make money - period. Most people in the UK certianly thought so form the time he started with his gradual selling of his Diana story..
Reply With Quote
  #1356  
Old 06-06-2016, 11:03 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,004
Yes, I agree. There's something very sleazy about making money from a former romantic relationship.

I've not heard an explanation of why his military career ended? Was he not intelligent enough to get promoted? Or was an affair with the Princess of Wales (then considered likely to be the future Queen Consort) considered beyond the Pale for a serving officer?
Reply With Quote
  #1357  
Old 06-07-2016, 02:33 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Would regarding Charles as 'erring in situations where others are severely penalised' (such as sleeping with a fellow officer's wife) be 'partisan', as well? After all, according to Household cavalry regulations an officer found in adultery with another officer's wife (the case with Charles and Andrew PB's spouse) would be liable to penalties like being thrown out of the regiment.
Does it matter if said officer is sleeping with everything in a skirt and not crying his eyes out at being cuckolded?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
No that is NOT all i am bothered about. It was wrong fro him to use his affair with Diana to make money - period. Most people in the UK certianly thought so form the time he started with his gradual selling of his Diana story..
Ok so my grand ole country the USofA embraced Fergie and tried to help her make some money. We did the same with Heather Mills....has James Hewitt made money in the US? I know we even tolerated Burrell for awhile.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #1358  
Old 06-07-2016, 03:17 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
Yes, it was open knowledge that APB was a ladies man from way back and it was rumoured that the PBs had an open marriage. Andrew himself was not sleeping in-house though, ie with the wives of his fellow officers, (as far as is known) and anyway, Hon Colonels of regiments such as the Prince of Wales was, are supposed to be above that sort of behaviour.

I think Hewitt spent some time in the US on a private visit some years after his books came out, trying to offload his last cache of Diana letters to the highest bidder. It was rumoured he was asking for over a million dollars for them, but as far as I know there were no takers. I don't know whether Hewitt's books were hugely popular in the US.
Reply With Quote
  #1359  
Old 06-07-2016, 04:18 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Yes, it was open knowledge that APB was a ladies man from way back and it was rumoured that the PBs had an open marriage. Andrew himself was not sleeping in-house though, ie with the wives of his fellow officers, (as far as is known) and anyway, Hon Colonels of regiments such as the Prince of Wales was, are supposed to be above that sort of behaviour.
Oh i know it is in the army regulations but I dont believe it is often enforced unless there is something else going on.. I can't quite see why an honorary col of a regiment should be considered to be "above that sort of behaviour". Diana was one..
As for Hewitt As I recall he failed exams for promotion and was in trouble for various transgressions, so he retired from the army with a pension.. which wasn't enough for him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Yes, I agree. There's something very sleazy about making money from a former romantic relationship.

r?
Seems to be very few who agree! I think it is horrible behavior especially (Old fashioned view I know) when it is done by a man about a woman. Hewitt started hinting to journalists about his affair with Diana for ages before he went the whole hog and wrote a book, and then went on and on flogging his story. He also said things about her that she had allegedly said to him, such as that Manakee was her lover.. He hinted that his affair with Diana started earlier and earlier to the point where he almost got to the point of saying he knew her before William was born. His outing their affair was as he must have known dangerous for Diana because she was trying to negotiate a divorce or some kind of arrangement about her position with the RF.. and the more public support she had, the better her position in the negotations would be....So for him to talk about their affair, to hint at her having had other affairs, might well have cooled the public on her and worsened her position in trying to sort out the end of her marriage...
Reply With Quote
  #1360  
Old 06-18-2016, 06:01 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Windsor, Canada
Posts: 1
Brown and blue eyes - genetic certainty

We take it as an undisputed fact that brown eyes are more dominant than blue and therefore it is impossible for a parent with brown eyes to have blue eyed children - however, I am a witness to it in reality. My Mother had dark brown eyes and my Father had deep blue eyes. My two brothers? Both have blue eyes. My brown eyed Mother gave birth to two boys with blue eyes.

Having said that, there are redheads in the Spencer family. I believe Harry's red hair comes from those genes. Again, thinking of my own family as an example, there is no red hair in my Dad's side of the family but a lot in my Mother's. My oldest brother - flaming red hair.

I think Harry looks much more like Prince Charles than James Hewitt - especially in the eyes! James Hewitt's are wide apart where as Prince Harry's are close together, just like his Father's, Prince Charles.

If a person puts a photo of James Hewitt and Prince Harry next to each other and really looks at them, there are so many differences. The ears, the chin, the eyes, the eyebrow colour, the shape of their foreheads, their smiles... the only similarity is in the nose - but then, Prince Charles has the same shaped nose.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Harry-Hewitt Comparison.jpg
Views:	16
Size:	81.1 KB
ID:	298881  
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, extramarital affair, james hewitt, paternity, prince charles, prince harry, prince of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
James Carnegie, 3rd Duke of Fife (1929-2015) and Family betina British Royals 30 07-06-2015 10:12 AM
James and Julia Ogilvy and Family News 1: December 2003- flirtmooni British Royals 19 05-09-2014 06:23 AM
Why do you like Diana? juliamontague Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 222 12-21-2011 03:40 AM
Sophie Gives Birth to a Son: James Alexander Philip Theo, Viscount Severn - 17.12.07 BeatrixFan The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family 237 01-27-2008 06:11 AM
James James Mclean Member Introductions 1 10-30-2007 06:19 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece haakon kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles prince oscar princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess stéphanie's daytime outfits queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 sheikh hamdan bin mohammed state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises